This is a DRAFT. DONT VOTE HERE, but you can give your feedback, ask for questions to be added or things to be rephrased.
You can only vote for questions that are in brackets -> [ ].
As a general guideline, people that [(aree registered for 3 months) and (have written 5 posts in the last two years)] or [(hold a record) and (are registered since 20.05.2017)] are considered active members of the community (this is still subject of discussion, but I think this covers pretty much everyone while preventing manipulation almost completely).

Public vote for GWSCR changes
1. Category: Legitimisation
[1.1] Do you agree with the way this vote is held and therefore with its results? (Yes/No)
NOTE: If more than 50% vote "No", we as moderators would probably have to determine the rules ourselves.
[1.2] Do you accept the basic population determined by the above mentionen rules to be representative? (Yes/No)
[1.3] Should only things that are specifically allowed be allowed? (Yes/No)
NOTE: "Yes" means that things have to be allowed before they eligible to be used in a record. "No" means that everything should be allowed that isnt forbidden.
2. Category: General Structure of Records
NOTE: You may vote for as many of the general solutions (2.1/2.2/2.3/2.4/2.5) as you like, the one with the most "Yes" votes will be chosen. You may also vote for all subordinite questions in case the general solution(s) you support do(es)nt end up getting a majority.
[2.1] Current System composed of pure (no 3rd party allowed at all), standard (some 3rd party are allowed while some others arent) and tas (all 3rd party allowed) (Yes/No)
NOTE: The following answers are only relevant if 2.1 or 2.4 happen to get a majority over the other options - you should vote here in case this happens.
[2.1.1] Should Texmod/UMod be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.2] Should health bar trackers be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.3] Should distance trackers be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.4] Should macros to execute multiple inputs (for example press skills 1-5 at the same time) be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.5] Should auto-pcons be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.6] Should hotkeys for items be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.7] Should hotkeys for movement be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.8] Should hotkeys for targetting be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.9] Should tools to interrupt (for example with ymlad) be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.10] Should the compass feature (shows you where you can and cant walk) of toolbox minimap be allowed in standard? (Yes/No)
[2.1.11] Should other forms of targetting than clicking on enemies, pressing tab or autotargetting (as given by the game itself) for be allowed in standard (excluding hotkeys, see 2.1.8)? (Yes/No)
[2.1.12] Should a minimap mod be allowed that shows you which direction enemies are facing? (Yes/No)
[2.1.13] Should a minimap mod be allowed that shows you where you placed your shadow of haste? (Yes/No)
[2.1.14] Should a minimap mod be allowed that shows you where your recall target is? (Yes/No)
[2.1.15] Should a minimap mod be allowed that shows you the area that is out of normal compass range? (Yes/No)
[2.1.16] Should a minimap mod be allowed that marks certain spots on the minimap? (Yes/No)
[2.1.17] Should a monitor for bonds be allowed, without beeing able to interact with the monitor? (Yes/No)
[2.1.18] Should a monitor for bonds be allowed, with beeing able to interact, for example cast or drop bonds? (Yes/No)
[2.1.19] Should forcing slow loads (and therefore connecting to the game really late) be allowed? (Yes/No)
[2.2] New System composed of only pure and tas (all standard records will become tas records) (Yes/No)
[2.3] New System composed of only pure (all standard and tas records would stop existing) (Yes/No)
[2.4] New system composed of only standard (all pure records would become standard records, tas record would stop existing)(Yes/No)
[2.5] New system composed of only tas (all pure and standard records would become tas records) (Yes/No)
[2.6] Should we tolerate little deviations from the new ruleset for old records in regard to 3rd party tools when those werent forbidden (for example distance trackers, minimap, bond monitor), since the people doing the record at the time did comply with the then current ruleset? (Yes/No)
3. Category: Videos and Screenshots
3.1 Category: Amount of videos required
NOTE: You may vote for as many options as you like, the one with the most "Yes" votes will be chosen.
[3.1.1] Records in the pure category require every single partymember to provide a video. (Yes/No)
[3.1.2] Records in the pure category require more than half of the party members to provide a video (so in case of 7 party members 4 videos, in case of 2 party members 2 videos) (Yes/No)
[3.1.3] Records in the pure category require one video. (Yes/No)
[3.1.4] Records in the standard category require every single partymember to provide a video. (Yes/No)
[3.1.5] Records in the standard category require more than half of the party members to provide a video (so in case of 7 party members 4 videos, in case of 2 party members 2 videos) (Yes/No)
[3.1.6] Records in the standard category require one video. (Yes/No)
[3.1.7] Records in the tas category require every single partymember to provide a video. (Yes/No)
[3.1.8] Records in the tas category require more than half of the party members to provide a video (so in case of 7 party members 4 videos, in case of 2 party members 2 videos) (Yes/No)
[3.1.9] Records in the tas category require one video. (Yes/No)
[3.2] Independent from 3.1, does every split (=split up for more than 30 seconds and/or for questionable tasks) have to be captured in at least one video? (Yes/No)
3.3 Category: Approving based on videos
NOTE: You may vote for as many options as you like, the one with the most "Yes" votes will be chosen.
[3.3.1] One mod has to see at least the amount of videos set in 3.1 (Yes/No)
[3.3.2] More than one mid has to see at least the amount of videos set in 3.1 (Yes/No)
[3.3.3] One video per record has to be public (Yes/No)
[3.3.4] All videos have to be public (Yes/No)
[3.4] Should we tolerate deviations from the new ruleset for old records in regard to videos, since the people doing the record at the time did comply with the then current ruleset? (Yes/No)
[3.5] Exception regarding 3.4: Should old coin drop records be sorted into the standard category (if that category still exists after the vote), even if it complied with the then current ruleset? (Yes/No)

Now, since there is nobody answering to the other topic (what I really hoped for tbh), heres the next step thats a lot more interesting again.

In the original plan, this includes:
"4. Determine how a vote would look like (anonymous? everyone can vote?)"

So, we should discuss the following questions:

Should everyone be allowed to vote?
Should only people be allowed to vote who have an account for at least x months or x years?
Should only people be allowed to vote who currently hold a record or have held one in the last x years?
Should mods be allowed to vote?
Should a vote be transferable?
Should everyone be allowed to vote but the vote of people who meet certain requirements is worth more?
If 30% vote in favor of something and 10% against and 60% dont mind the result, should the change be made?
How should we determine what gets voted on? Everything? Moderator decision? Collect stuff somewhere?

We wont get around to doing a recorded vote, else this could be manipulated too easily.

And as always, if I forget anything obvious, feel free to tell me and I ll edit it in.

This is the 2nd to last step. The next one after this will be the vote itself, based on the results of this thread.

Flo wrote:Should everyone be allowed to vote?
Should only people be allowed to vote who have an account for at least x months or x years?

No, nobody should be allowed to vote. All decisions should be based on logic and consensus.

Flo wrote:If 30% vote in favor of something and 10% against and 60% dont mind the result, should the change be made?

If even one person has a sound logical objection to a something, we need to hold off on implementing that change until their objection has been neutralised. If 99% of people don't feel comfortable with something but have no real way to express the problem, they can be ignored. This is not a popularity contest, so percentages don't matter.

We didnt. One option would be to have the vote about EVERYTHING, every structure, every detail and every rule. A different option would be to collect questions somewhere and vote based off that. But sure, waiting for your ideas.

I ll add this to the first post.

@Misty

Consensus is great but only works on really basic stuff. Consensus is not going to reunite completely different stances, like in the pro/contra minimap discussion. It just ends in two sides repeating their points and not moving a bit. But again, just tell us why you think the next time it would be different.

Please provide us with a working system to decide purely based on logic which is failproof in terms of logically thinking, considering no human being on earth is, and can come up with solutions in a reasonable amount of time. Furthermore while you're at it don't forget that discussions have shown not to be an option in the past. Until then your opinion is not an option. If you do find a solution however you may aswell begin with revolutionizing every governing system IRL instead.

I personally agree more or less with what Cruz said only that I think not giving mods the right to vote may need to be given a second thought depending on how far their privileges go in terms of creating a poll (e.g. is there room to manipulate the options in your favor?).

Yes, there would always be the opportunity to influence the result if only a subset of questions get voted on. Thats pretty unavoidable, but if someone has a better idea, go ahead. I think we Nika + Has + Me (+ Mike) represent diverse enough opinions that we should be able to figure out which options should be given.

But again, I am also not oposed to the idea of voting about EVERYTHING. It would take a while longer to set up and would probably reduce the number of people participating but then we would not have to deal with selecting questions and the whole stuff related to that problem.

Also, I think we should stop the practice of "this stuff is forbidden" and instead move towards "this stuff is allowed". So when a new thing comes around it needs to be allowed and not forbidden. This prevents confusion about whether a new tool is accepted in records without having an unsatisfying transition period.